Supreme Court Refuses Anticipatory Bail To Karnataka BJP MLA BA Basavaraja In Bikla Siva Murder Case

The Supreme Court today refused to grant anticipatory bail to Karnataka BJP MLA BA Basavaraja (Byrathi Basavaraja) in the Bikla Shiva Murder Case.

After the bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi expressed disinclination to entertain the matter, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, for the petitioner, chose to withdraw the matter with liberty to seek regular bail after surrendering.

The case relates to the murder of V G Shivaprakash alias Bikla Shiva in Bengaluru on July 15 last year. Basavaraja, who represents the KR Pura constituency, is alleged to be the conspirator behind the murder.

At the outset, Rohatgi claimed that there was absolutely no material against the petitioner and that the property, which was involved in the dispute, was not even in his constituency.

"There is an element of conspiracy against you," CJI observed. Rohatgi asserted that there was absolutely no material to show that. "There is absolutely nothing to show that I was interested in buying the property," Rohatgi said, highlighting that he was granted interim protection by the High Court from August 2025 till February 2, when his petition was ultimately dismissed.

Rohatgi pointed out that the mother of the deceased has not given any statement against the petitioner. CJI said that, being an MLA, the petitioner can't be expected to kill a person directly. "These landgrabbers, they have political protection. They are all a group of criminals," CJI said.

Rohatgi said that the petitioner was being politically targeted. He also pointed out the Karnataka High Court's December 2025 order setting aside the prior approval granted for invoking the Karnataka Control of Organised Crimes Act, 2000 (KCOCA) against the MLA.

Justice Bagchi said that "in a murder case, we have to be extremely circumspect."

CJI said that the chain of events showed that the deceased had gone to the property, which was being claimed by two rival groups; the deceased had claimed to be the General Power Attorney holder and flashed it, when one person named Jagdish asked him to hand over the GPA and attacked him. The allegation is that Jagdish was in contact with the petitioner, the CJI pointed out.

Rohatgi said that the property is only 130 square yards, and the petitioner, being a 4-time MLA, would not be so desperate to grab such a small plot. The bench said that if there was no material, then the petitioner should boldly face the interrogation.

Justice Bagchi said that the Court could have accepted the petitioner's argument had he not suppressed his contacts with A1(first accused). "We would have accepted that but for the fact that you said you don't know A1 Jagadish, whereas the CDR shows that on the day of incident, there was a call between you and Jagadish. It was an evasive stand," Justice Bagchi.

After CJI said that the defence of the petitioner was a subject matter of investigation, Rohatgi chose to withdraw the petition.

"We request the Court concerned to decide the said application for regular bail expeditiously," the bench observed in the order dismissing the petition as withdrawn.

Senior Advocate Siddharth Luthra appeared for the State.

Case Details : B.A. BASAVARAJA vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA| SLP(Crl) No. 002619 - / 2026